35. Analysis of the professional experience,
gender and ethnicity of police and crime commissioners is relevant
for assessing whether they genuinely reflect the diverse public
whom they are elected to represent.

36. Thirty-five of the new police and crime commissioners
are male, six are female. 15 seats were contested by an all-male
line-up of candidates. We note that the small number of women
elected stems from the fact that 18% (35) of candidates were women,
rather than an expression of voter preference.

51.56% of candidates (99 candidates) had been elected
politicians (councillors, MPs, MEPs, Assembly Members). Of those
that were elected, 25 had a background in politics.

Over 50% of candidates had experience of working
in the fields of policing or criminal justice.

Thirty nine (20.3%) candidates are known to have
served on a police authority.

Thirty two (16.6%) candidates are known to have
been employed by or served within the police service (predominantly
former officers but also some Special Constables). Eight of those
elected were former officers.

Sixteen (8.3%) candidates are known to have served
in the armed forces. Seven were elected.

Sixteen (8.3%) candidates are known to be, or
to have been a Magistrate. Five of those elected were magistrates.

Thirty five (18%) candidates are women. Six of
those elected were women.

Twenty candidates were from ethnic minorities.
No elected PCCs are from an ethnic minority.[31]

37. The diversity of candidates may have been
affected by the election entry requirements. To stand for election
as a police and crime commissioner, 100 signatures were required
to support a nomination to stand, along with a £5,000 deposit.
In an election for the House of Commons, candidates need ten signatures
and a £500 deposit to validate their nomination. Candidates
themselves believed that these barriers to entry were a problem,
especially for independent candidates of whom three quarters (74%)
considered that this had been a barrier.[32]

38. The election was also marked by a significant
number of disqualifications. No one convicted of any imprisonable
offence was allowed to stand for election, even if they were not
actually imprisoned or the conviction had been spent. This included
offences that took place as a juvenile.[33]The Electoral Commission highlighted that the PCCs election
was characterised by stricter disqualification rules for people
with certain previous convictions than most elections and it suggested
that the rules were not well-understood by candidates.[34]
Two candidates withdrew their candidature before the deadline
for withdrawal passed and one candidate later declared himself
disqualified.

39. The first police and crime
commissioners are a monoculture. Only 1 in 7 are women and there
is a complete lack of representation of ethnic minorities amongst
the commissioners. All national political parties have made a
virtue of the importance of diversity, but this does not seem
to have extended to the candidates for police and crime commissioners.
There was clear cross-party support for the conclusions of the
Speakers Conference on Parliamentary Representation, which highlighted
the barrier to diversity created by costly election processesthe
implications for diversity of a high-cost election should not
have come as a surprise.

40. In future, where local parties
are involved in the selection of candidates for police and crime
commissioner, they should certainly take an active role in increasing
the recruitment pool at the start of the electoral process to
reflect the diversity of the electorate.

41. High barriers to entrythe
requirement for 100 signatures and a £5,000 depositare
intended to uphold the integrity of the office of Police and Crime
Commissioner and to discourage frivolous candidacies. Although
this may well be appropriate, it might also have an effect on
competition and diversity in the PCC elections. Therefore, it
is our intention to return to this question later this year, in
our inquiry on PCCs. While we recognise that PCCs must be of the
highest integrity, we also believe that the rules barring anyone
from standing who has a criminal conviction for an imprisonable
offence, even as a juvenile, are excessive and should be brought
into line with the rules for other public offices.

Further scrutiny

42. Police and crime commissioners
are a lynchpin in the new landscape of policing. The next PCC
elections in three years (2016) will be an appropriate time for
an overall assessment of what has actually been achieved by the
Commissioners, and whether the change which has occurred could
be considered a successful alternative to the previous arrangements.
In the meantime, we will return to this issue in a major Report
a year on from their appointment: we will be looking at the effectiveness
of the current commissioners and how their work is contributing
to crime reduction and cost efficiency.

43. In order to hold the Commissioners
to account, this Report sets out the first register of PCCs' interests.
It is clear that this kind of national picture will be valuable
to the electorate and to the commissioners themselves. In future,
we expect an independent national body such as HMIC to take on
the responsibility for compiling a complete register. This will
complement and strengthen the system of local accountability that
is already in place.